Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 1184 invoked from network); 25 May 2005 15:25:10 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 May 2005 15:25:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 63572 invoked by uid 500); 25 May 2005 15:24:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 63535 invoked by uid 500); 25 May 2005 15:24:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Users List" Reply-To: "Ant Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list user@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 63507 invoked by uid 99); 25 May 2005 15:24:56 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from smtpext53.bankone.com (HELO smtpext53.bankone.com) (159.53.46.167) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 25 May 2005 08:24:55 -0700 Received: from smtpesf13.svr.bankone.net (smtpesf13.svr.bankone.net [155.180.200.177]) by smtpext53.bankone.com (Switch-3.1.3/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j4PFObDP023115 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 15:24:37 GMT Received: from cmhmsw12.ad.bankone.net (smtpmsw11.svr.bankone.net [53.20.4.162]) by smtpesf13.svr.bankone.net (Switch-3.1.3/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j4PFOaeO013133 for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 15:24:36 GMT Received: from phlms169.bankone.net (unverified [155.180.246.28]) by cmhmsw12.ad.bankone.net (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 11:24:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1116948367.4293478f977db@aragorntools.webappcabaret.net> Subject: Antcall Vs. macrodef To: "Ant Users List" X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.1 January 21, 2004 Message-ID: From: glenn.h.brown@jpmorgan.com Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 10:24:36 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on PHLMS169/MS/SVR/ONE (Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 05/25/2005 11:24:36 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi folks, I am writing a common build script for 2 departments that build similar products but have some slightly different requirements in terms of build structure. My plan was to have modular independent functions so that the common functionality could be used by both teams and the different functions can be called as separate targets. In this case, is it generally considered preferable to use the antcall or macrodef? If the answer is "it depends" what are the circumstances in which one would be preferable over the other? This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data and other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org